DoS'ing people is bad. Bad bad bad bad bad. Oh wait a minute... except for them."
Well yeah, because the people they're DoS'ing are thieves. They pretty much shouldn't complain about whatever happens to themselves, and acting like they have any moral high ground over anybody else is hilarious.
A lot of people around here think there's no harm in hackers doing that to other people's computers, going so far to squeal when they get "ratted out" by others or end up in court for their actions. But is the MPAA decides to do it, it's all of a sudden a bad thing? Yokayyyy...
Take it up with Yahoo -- either their charts are wrong, you're reading them incorrectly, or the news they're publishing is wrong. That info was taken directly from Yahoo's financial articles (http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/020718/tech_microsoft_ear ns_5.html): "Microsoft's stock is up nearly 18 percent so far this year, while the Nasdaq has lost 45 percent."
you better sell off that msft stock, it will hemmorage value soon.
Yeah, and Eric Raymond told us that Microsoft stock would be entering a death spiral by the beginning of 2001. Yet while NASDAQ is down 45% this year, MSFT is up 18%. You chumps might want to stay away from the stock market, 'cause your distinct lack of any clue is getting embarrassing.
Heh, I bet the head IT decision-maker at Sherwin Williams is shitting his pants right about now. Dude probably has a nice pink slip sitting on his desk waiting for him tomorrow morning.
Yeah, I'm sure that all those paying subscribers can't wait to have their services disrupted so that they can be guinea pigs for AOL. I'm sure they have nothing better to do than send Compuserve "zounds of customer feedback" saying that the things they want to do are now broken.
Hello, they're insuring that it's easy for people to get back to Google, so that they can hit 'em for some more ad views. There's not an ounce of altruism to this.
Microsoft has offered TerraServer access as a web service for over a year now. You can still see the current incarnation at TerraService.net. As I said, it's been around for over a year now, because I still see cached articles about it from last April. Nice try, though.;)
How do you figure Google has some strong Open Source relationship? Have they given out their source code so that people could create their own Googles? Serious question, maybe they have and I just didn't know about it.
And how would an API such as this "easily muscle out any sniff of a competition from other search engine wannabes"? I don't think too many other guys are going to be rushing out to implement this, seeing as every time someone uses the API, they're not seeing the ads. People stop seeing the ads, advertisers stop giving Google money. Google stops getting money, Google go bye bye. Google's already unsure how they can make money from this as it is, I wouldn't expect everyone else to make the blind jump along with them.
Re:Please explain
on
XP, Phone Home
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Yes, but Bash, Netscape etc. doesn't trasmit that dat back to an 800lb gorrila, my friend.
"According to a network traffic analysis performed by Newsbytes, Netscape is capturing Navigator 6 users' search terms, along with their Internet protocol (IP) address, the date Navigator was installed and a unique identification number."
Hmmm, a unique identification number, eh? So forget logging your IP address with your search (which Microsoft and the other search engines claim not to do), forget gathering demographic data (which the XP Search Assistant also doesn't do), but Netscape is actually using a unique ID numbers to tie searches to specific individual users.
I can't believe I just read that. I've never really gotten into the whole Katz-bashing thing, but that one little phrase makes it perfectly clear to me why so many do. The guy definitely needs to have the shit beat out of him with a clue stick, if not a baseball bat.
"Community support" won't put food on the table
on
Lineo near Death
·
· Score: 2
Just ask Indrema, Loki, or VA Whatever. In fact, of the main Linux distributions, Red Hat is way up there in terms of being criticized by the Linux community ("The Microsoft of the Linux world," and other such charges), yet they've been the most prosperous of all of them.
Re:Any Open Source/Linux/BSD Companies doing well?
on
Lineo near Death
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Is there anyone out there in the OpenSource Business World that is doing it right, making a profit and kicking corporate butt?
No Linux companies are, and Mandrake Club won't survive much longer either. BSD companies can because they have the ability to add value above and beyond the standard product to differentiate themselves while not having to give away their source code to their competitors just lying in wait for a code drop. If you're thinking about starting a company that's going to produce GPL'd software, please just give your money away to a decent charity so that at least some good might come of it before it's all gone.
You mean the way RedHat uses Microsoft Office internally instead of anything available for Linux?
The reason why this isn't news is because this campaign is about replacing big iron Unix machines with 8-cpu and greater Windows servers running Datacenter Server. It's not about getting rid of dinky little web servers serving up one static page and a handful of PDFs. Sounds like a perfect job for a FreeBSD box -- of course, hardly anybody around here understands concept of using the right tool for the job -- which isn't in the same league as the Unisys systems they're selling or the Unix ones that they're targetting.
I mean c'mon. We get tons of mentions of.NET around here, talk about how Microsoft is only into closed source, etc. Now Microsoft actually releases 1.9 million lines of source code spread among almost 10,000 files that people can compile to get.NET up and running on their FreeBSD boxes, and Slashdot suddenly clams up about it?
Who can honestly say that this isn't a story of interest to a large amount of people here, whether they hate.NET or not? There's a lot of discussion to be had about it. Comparisons to Mono/DotGnu? The licensing details? The performance? Comparisons to Java on FreeBSD? To pretend it doesn't exist is just silly and does seem to call Slashdot's motives into question.
Well, for FreeBSD users who might be interested, I'll go ahead and post a link to a few articles about it myself, from O'Reilly's site who's been doing a pretty decent job of breaking it down: http://www.oreillynet.com/dotnet/. Discuss amongst yourselves.;)
Hey man, I would love to quit calling you stupid, but you gotta give me a reason to first. After saying you re-read the article, you're still insisting that he didn't say WMP is of higher quality, when he clearly said, "Not that I love Media Player, but it sure beats that crappy Real Player or that irritating nagware that is Quicktime."
Furthermore, both I and the article agree that WMP is inferior in quality to Quicktime.
Actually the article doesn't comment on the quality of WMP or the Quicktime player. But I'm trying not to call you stupid, I promise.
is that the WMP for Macintosh is truly awful and damned near unusable
Congratulations, now you know how non-Mac users have felt about the Quicktime player for Windows for ages now. Just look at the comments about it. Considering how long Apple's been making a Windows version, it's amazing that it's still such garbage.
I'd like to know what your big complaint about the Quicktime Player is?
Well, it seems like Apple finally figured out how to quit messing up people's systems with their QuickTime installation programs, so that's a plus. However, being nagware, it's very annoying. I'm not going to buy it just to view a Star Wars trailer every 6 months or so, which is about the only reason non-Mac people install it for. Even when you aren't moving it around, there is so much flicker in the interface when it plays that it truly looks like it was written by amateurs. Sometimes it even makes the desktop icons flicker it's so bad. Otherwise, it's juuuuuust wonderful.
"To heck with open source, to heck with cross-platform issues, to heck with quality. Make mine WMP!"
Re-read his post, stupid. He just said he feels WMP is of higher quality than Real Player or Quicktime. And I'd be one of those who agree, not because WMP is the best thing since beer in a can, but because the Real and Quicktime clients are pretty poor.
Basically you're saying, "To heck with quality, it can suck like a two-dollar whore, as long as it's open source and runs on multiple platforms it's good enough for me!" Well, I don't give a shit how many platforms WMP is on, it covers 99% of the marketplace by being on Windows and Macs. I don't care whether it's open source or not, I've got better ways of wasting my time than wading through source code. Quality is king, period, and WMP has the others beat here.
That's a good one. I suppose you run your website off of IIS on Windows 2000 Advanced Server, eh? Have fun with Code Red, NIMDA, and the others?
Why would they cause me any problems? Microsoft came out with patches for the holes well before Code Red and Nimda ever came out. Since you seem baffled by the concept of security patches, I hope nobody ever points you to MacOS X's (or RedHat's, or Debian's, or Solaris's, etc.) security fix pages, because you're likely to faint at how wide open to being rooted your computer has been all this time.
Actually, I choose to use mostly Microsoft products because Win2K/XP and the apps available for them are vastly better than Linux and what's available for it.
I like how you say that choice is what makes Linux great -- well, I guess except for the people who choose to use it for free as was promised: Those guys are just "low-life fucking leaches." I suggest you drop the wordplay and just start calling it shareware.
It would be a crying shame for this company to fall down at this point in their growth, especially when so many of it's users never spend a cent to support them.
Absolute rubbish. Just start calling it de facto shareware if, every time one of these companies goes tits up, you people are going to guilt-trip everyone who chose to believe that $0 price tag you guys were selling.
Hmm, a lot of Linux zealots preach how wonderful Linux is because it's free as in beer. Now the people who bought into that hype and choose not to pay are "low-life fucking leaches?" Nice strategy, there.
The problem with that is that there are a lot of people around here, like Jon Katz, who love telling everyone that forums and weblogs and the like are New Journalism just waiting to replace those Old White Guys in traditional journalism. They get offended when they aren't taken as seriously as the old forms, and stamp their feet when they can't get press credentials to media events.
Now whenever people do take those participating in New Journalism seriously, whether it's complaining about poor editing, lack of fact-checking, or libel or slander, we're told that "Hey, it's all just the opinions of some dude on a web site! Big deal!" Sorry guys, you can't have it both ways. Get back to us when you decide how you want to be treated.
It's beautiful to see that even the main Slashdot guy recognizes what a naive ass Eric Raymond is. Hey ESR, seeing as your predictions always turn out wrong, please go back to amusing us with your boasts of how rich you are. *cough* I mean were.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
As uncool to say, and as extreme as it sounds, the digital sky is truly falling.
You're right, that is uncool. Could you possibly come up with a lamer platitude? Wait, I know -- Information wants to be free!
What a pathetic life you lead, I hope you've made sure the tinfoil cap that you wear is a comfortable fit.
DoS'ing people is bad. Bad bad bad bad bad. Oh wait a minute... except for them."
Well yeah, because the people they're DoS'ing are thieves. They pretty much shouldn't complain about whatever happens to themselves, and acting like they have any moral high ground over anybody else is hilarious.
A lot of people around here think there's no harm in hackers doing that to other people's computers, going so far to squeal when they get "ratted out" by others or end up in court for their actions. But is the MPAA decides to do it, it's all of a sudden a bad thing? Yokayyyy...
Take it up with Yahoo -- either their charts are wrong, you're reading them incorrectly, or the news they're publishing is wrong. That info was taken directly from Yahoo's financial articles (http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/020718/tech_microsoft_ear ns_5.html): "Microsoft's stock is up nearly 18 percent so far this year, while the Nasdaq has lost 45 percent."
you better sell off that msft stock, it will hemmorage value soon.
Yeah, and Eric Raymond told us that Microsoft stock would be entering a death spiral by the beginning of 2001. Yet while NASDAQ is down 45% this year, MSFT is up 18%. You chumps might want to stay away from the stock market, 'cause your distinct lack of any clue is getting embarrassing.
Heh, I bet the head IT decision-maker at Sherwin Williams is shitting his pants right about now. Dude probably has a nice pink slip sitting on his desk waiting for him tomorrow morning.
After all, everybody knows it's UNBREAKABLE.
Yeah, I'm sure that all those paying subscribers can't wait to have their services disrupted so that they can be guinea pigs for AOL. I'm sure they have nothing better to do than send Compuserve "zounds of customer feedback" saying that the things they want to do are now broken.
I can't help but be impressed.
Hello, they're insuring that it's easy for people to get back to Google, so that they can hit 'em for some more ad views. There's not an ounce of altruism to this.
Microsoft has offered TerraServer access as a web service for over a year now. You can still see the current incarnation at TerraService.net. As I said, it's been around for over a year now, because I still see cached articles about it from last April. Nice try, though. ;)
How do you figure Google has some strong Open Source relationship? Have they given out their source code so that people could create their own Googles? Serious question, maybe they have and I just didn't know about it.
And how would an API such as this "easily muscle out any sniff of a competition from other search engine wannabes"? I don't think too many other guys are going to be rushing out to implement this, seeing as every time someone uses the API, they're not seeing the ads. People stop seeing the ads, advertisers stop giving Google money. Google stops getting money, Google go bye bye. Google's already unsure how they can make money from this as it is, I wouldn't expect everyone else to make the blind jump along with them.
Yes, but Bash, Netscape etc. doesn't trasmit that dat back to an 800lb gorrila, my friend.
Preach on, brother! Erm, oh wait...
Hmmm, a unique identification number, eh? So forget logging your IP address with your search (which Microsoft and the other search engines claim not to do), forget gathering demographic data (which the XP Search Assistant also doesn't do), but Netscape is actually using a unique ID numbers to tie searches to specific individual users.
Wanna try again? ;)
I can't believe I just read that. I've never really gotten into the whole Katz-bashing thing, but that one little phrase makes it perfectly clear to me why so many do. The guy definitely needs to have the shit beat out of him with a clue stick, if not a baseball bat.
Just ask Indrema, Loki, or VA Whatever. In fact, of the main Linux distributions, Red Hat is way up there in terms of being criticized by the Linux community ("The Microsoft of the Linux world," and other such charges), yet they've been the most prosperous of all of them.
Is there anyone out there in the OpenSource Business World that is doing it right, making a profit and kicking corporate butt?
No Linux companies are, and Mandrake Club won't survive much longer either. BSD companies can because they have the ability to add value above and beyond the standard product to differentiate themselves while not having to give away their source code to their competitors just lying in wait for a code drop. If you're thinking about starting a company that's going to produce GPL'd software, please just give your money away to a decent charity so that at least some good might come of it before it's all gone.
You mean the way RedHat uses Microsoft Office internally instead of anything available for Linux?
The reason why this isn't news is because this campaign is about replacing big iron Unix machines with 8-cpu and greater Windows servers running Datacenter Server. It's not about getting rid of dinky little web servers serving up one static page and a handful of PDFs. Sounds like a perfect job for a FreeBSD box -- of course, hardly anybody around here understands concept of using the right tool for the job -- which isn't in the same league as the Unisys systems they're selling or the Unix ones that they're targetting.
I mean c'mon. We get tons of mentions of .NET around here, talk about how Microsoft is only into closed source, etc. Now Microsoft actually releases 1.9 million lines of source code spread among almost 10,000 files that people can compile to get .NET up and running on their FreeBSD boxes, and Slashdot suddenly clams up about it?
Who can honestly say that this isn't a story of interest to a large amount of people here, whether they hate .NET or not? There's a lot of discussion to be had about it. Comparisons to Mono/DotGnu? The licensing details? The performance? Comparisons to Java on FreeBSD? To pretend it doesn't exist is just silly and does seem to call Slashdot's motives into question.
Well, for FreeBSD users who might be interested, I'll go ahead and post a link to a few articles about it myself, from O'Reilly's site who's been doing a pretty decent job of breaking it down: http://www.oreillynet.com/dotnet/. Discuss amongst yourselves. ;)
Hey man, I would love to quit calling you stupid, but you gotta give me a reason to first. After saying you re-read the article, you're still insisting that he didn't say WMP is of higher quality, when he clearly said, "Not that I love Media Player, but it sure beats that crappy Real Player or that irritating nagware that is Quicktime."
Furthermore, both I and the article agree that WMP is inferior in quality to Quicktime.
Actually the article doesn't comment on the quality of WMP or the Quicktime player. But I'm trying not to call you stupid, I promise.
is that the WMP for Macintosh is truly awful and damned near unusable
Congratulations, now you know how non-Mac users have felt about the Quicktime player for Windows for ages now. Just look at the comments about it. Considering how long Apple's been making a Windows version, it's amazing that it's still such garbage.
I'd like to know what your big complaint about the Quicktime Player is?
Well, it seems like Apple finally figured out how to quit messing up people's systems with their QuickTime installation programs, so that's a plus. However, being nagware, it's very annoying. I'm not going to buy it just to view a Star Wars trailer every 6 months or so, which is about the only reason non-Mac people install it for. Even when you aren't moving it around, there is so much flicker in the interface when it plays that it truly looks like it was written by amateurs. Sometimes it even makes the desktop icons flicker it's so bad. Otherwise, it's juuuuuust wonderful.
"To heck with open source, to heck with cross-platform issues, to heck with quality. Make mine WMP!"
Re-read his post, stupid. He just said he feels WMP is of higher quality than Real Player or Quicktime. And I'd be one of those who agree, not because WMP is the best thing since beer in a can, but because the Real and Quicktime clients are pretty poor.
Basically you're saying, "To heck with quality, it can suck like a two-dollar whore, as long as it's open source and runs on multiple platforms it's good enough for me!" Well, I don't give a shit how many platforms WMP is on, it covers 99% of the marketplace by being on Windows and Macs. I don't care whether it's open source or not, I've got better ways of wasting my time than wading through source code. Quality is king, period, and WMP has the others beat here.
That's a good one. I suppose you run your website off of IIS on Windows 2000 Advanced Server, eh? Have fun with Code Red, NIMDA, and the others?
Why would they cause me any problems? Microsoft came out with patches for the holes well before Code Red and Nimda ever came out. Since you seem baffled by the concept of security patches, I hope nobody ever points you to MacOS X's (or RedHat's, or Debian's, or Solaris's, etc.) security fix pages, because you're likely to faint at how wide open to being rooted your computer has been all this time.
Actually, I choose to use mostly Microsoft products because Win2K/XP and the apps available for them are vastly better than Linux and what's available for it.
I like how you say that choice is what makes Linux great -- well, I guess except for the people who choose to use it for free as was promised: Those guys are just "low-life fucking leaches." I suggest you drop the wordplay and just start calling it shareware.
It would be a crying shame for this company to fall down at this point in their growth, especially when so many of it's users never spend a cent to support them.
Absolute rubbish. Just start calling it de facto shareware if, every time one of these companies goes tits up, you people are going to guilt-trip everyone who chose to believe that $0 price tag you guys were selling.
Hmm, a lot of Linux zealots preach how wonderful Linux is because it's free as in beer. Now the people who bought into that hype and choose not to pay are "low-life fucking leaches?" Nice strategy, there.
The problem with that is that there are a lot of people around here, like Jon Katz, who love telling everyone that forums and weblogs and the like are New Journalism just waiting to replace those Old White Guys in traditional journalism. They get offended when they aren't taken as seriously as the old forms, and stamp their feet when they can't get press credentials to media events.
Now whenever people do take those participating in New Journalism seriously, whether it's complaining about poor editing, lack of fact-checking, or libel or slander, we're told that "Hey, it's all just the opinions of some dude on a web site! Big deal!" Sorry guys, you can't have it both ways. Get back to us when you decide how you want to be treated.
It's beautiful to see that even the main Slashdot guy recognizes what a naive ass Eric Raymond is. Hey ESR, seeing as your predictions always turn out wrong, please go back to amusing us with your boasts of how rich you are. *cough* I mean were. ;-)